Platitudes
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-09-2014, 04:34 AM
RE: Platitudes
(08-09-2014 06:23 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(08-09-2014 05:44 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  I will paste a tiny bit of my posting from History of Christianity REL 450 class on this very subject. Basic doctrine of jesus christ is:

Taking into consideration the Christian tradition of Jesus of the NT; As a teacher, Jesus had a lot in common with the Pharisees, especially those who follow the “spirit of the law.” Like them, he valued the temple sacrifices but was more concerned with how people lived their lives. Jesus shared the Pharisees belief that the Torah was sacred and thought that sincerely attempting to follow it was the way to come closer to God, but he went further – Jesus taught that the true meaning of the Torah could be summed up into the phrases: love God, and love your neighbor. This, to Jesus, was the essence of the Torah, the essence of Judaism, and the essence of what he wanted to know (Stewart 26).

Works cited:

Stewart, Cynthia., The Catholic church: a brief popular history. Winona, Mn: Anselm Academic, Christian Brothers Publications, 2008. Print.

Smartass

The thing is, all that is, really, .... is a re-hash of the general trends of the time. Nothing is unique to Jesus. I find it (not your exposition of it, but the fact it's proposed at all) really strange. First of all, all Jewish rabbis were married. There was only one who wasn't, and it was SO unusual that it was remarked on, and written about. No one questioned Jesus about it. THAT is VERY VERY odd. The lives of young Jewish men who became rabbis, were very regimented, and marriage was an integral step. Second, the "Love god and love your neighbor" thing was not unique in any way to him. At the time of the diaspora, there was a general trend towards simplifying all the legalisms. May of the Jewish preachers were preaching this particular simplification. As far as I can see, this "doctrine" is an argument that they cooked him up from scratch by assembling general themes that were known to be circulating. I'm also starting to wonder if Paul ever really existed. How is it no Jewish rabbinic writings of the time even mention an apostate star student of Gamaliel, who studied under the "master" and enforced orthodoxy on behalf of the high priests, suddenly changed his stance ? Not one word from the rabbis about the star pupil who "went bad". Such a renegade rabbi could not have escaped the attention of the scribes. Drinking Beverage

Mmmmmm. Did "Paul" exist? Well...probably yes. He was too "fucked up" mentally to be a 100% fabrication. Myth creators in those days weren't that intuitive to create him. Paul was anxious, paranoid, obsessive and narrow minded...a psychologist's puzzle...a way too complex case to be a first century literary invention.

Of course I could be underestimating whoever... (Marcion?)...
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2014, 06:06 AM
RE: Platitudes
(08-09-2014 06:30 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  Oh I am with you Robby, you and I share very similar critical views of the reality of any of it. Especially when the scholars openly admit that it was the custom back then to attribute any writings to a historical or legendary "mythical hero" or "legend" in order to give it credibility. i.e noah, moses etc

Actually, Bucky wrote that. Between the red text and a few similarities in the names, I can see the confusion.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-09-2014, 08:16 AM
RE: Platitudes
(09-09-2014 04:34 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(08-09-2014 06:23 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  The thing is, all that is, really, .... is a re-hash of the general trends of the time. Nothing is unique to Jesus. I find it (not your exposition of it, but the fact it's proposed at all) really strange. First of all, all Jewish rabbis were married. There was only one who wasn't, and it was SO unusual that it was remarked on, and written about. No one questioned Jesus about it. THAT is VERY VERY odd. The lives of young Jewish men who became rabbis, were very regimented, and marriage was an integral step. Second, the "Love god and love your neighbor" thing was not unique in any way to him. At the time of the diaspora, there was a general trend towards simplifying all the legalisms. May of the Jewish preachers were preaching this particular simplification. As far as I can see, this "doctrine" is an argument that they cooked him up from scratch by assembling general themes that were known to be circulating. I'm also starting to wonder if Paul ever really existed. How is it no Jewish rabbinic writings of the time even mention an apostate star student of Gamaliel, who studied under the "master" and enforced orthodoxy on behalf of the high priests, suddenly changed his stance ? Not one word from the rabbis about the star pupil who "went bad". Such a renegade rabbi could not have escaped the attention of the scribes. Drinking Beverage

Mmmmmm. Did "Paul" exist? Well...probably yes. He was too "fucked up" mentally to be a 100% fabrication. Myth creators in those days weren't that intuitive to create him. Paul was anxious, paranoid, obsessive and narrow minded...a psychologist's puzzle...a way too complex case to be a first century literary invention.

Of course I could be underestimating whoever... (Marcion?)...

I would agree. Some Pauls existed. But why is it the Jewish scribes who wrote about everything else, write nothing about a "Jew gone bad", a Jew of their own number, a Jew who was important enough to sit at the feet of Gamaliel, who turned renegade ? Why was he "on the Road to Damascus" at all ? The Jewish priests, for which he supposedly was zealous, had no authority there. He had nothing he could do there to bother Christians. I'm reading "A House Divided", (Vincent Martin) --- here's an excerpt ... http://books.google.com/books?id=ATocfSo...on&f=false

If the early Christians were very much still Jews early on, why would he have been going after them at all, that early, IF, (as we know) the members of the Way (sub)sect of Judaism (what was to evolve into Christianity) were really failthful Jews ... so "faithful" that just before the turn of the First Century, the Expulsion Curses were required to be read in the synagogues, (and then we know they were not really all that effective ... as (St.) John Chrysostom's congregation 200 years later were STILL considering themselves as Jews.

Something stinks here in River City.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: